↓ Skip to main content

Immune Microenvironment in Glioblastoma Subtypes

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
465 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Immune Microenvironment in Glioblastoma Subtypes
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2018.01004
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhihong Chen, Dolores Hambardzumyan

Abstract

Glioblastomas (GBMs) are the most common and aggressive primary brain tumors. Due to their malignant growth and invasion into the brain parenchyma coupled with resistance to therapy, GBMs are among the deadliest of all cancers. GBMs are highly heterogeneous at both the molecular and histological levels. Hallmark histological structures include pseudopalisading necrosis and microvascular proliferation. In addition to high levels of intratumoral heterogeneity, GBMs also exhibit high levels of inter-tumoral heterogeneity. The major non-neoplastic cell population in the GBM microenvironment includes cells of the innate immune system called tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs). Correlative data from the literature suggest that molecularly distinct GBM subtypes exhibit differences in their microenvironment. Data from mouse models of GBM suggest that genetic driver mutations can create unique microenvironments. Here, we review the origin, features, and functions of TAMs in distinct GBM subtypes. We also discuss their interactions with other immune cell constituents and discuss prospects of therapeutically targeting TAMs to increase the efficacy of T-cell functions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 465 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 465 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 79 17%
Student > Master 55 12%
Researcher 50 11%
Student > Bachelor 49 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 27 6%
Other 59 13%
Unknown 146 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 96 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 57 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 30 6%
Neuroscience 30 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 6%
Other 62 13%
Unknown 164 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 May 2019.
All research outputs
#14,393,794
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#11,654
of 31,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,338
of 341,279 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#343
of 733 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,537 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,279 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 733 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.